End of Lease Strategies?

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
leafygood said:
When we start working with the dealerships on purchasing, what is a good ball park we should aim for based on the above information?
I think you will find zero flexibility in the cost of buyout at end of lease, when you begin "working with dealerships". There is a residual figure in your contract, and a buyout fee. NMAC is offering no buyout promotions at this time and there is no money in it for the dealership that would cause them to subsidize your buyout. About the only other thing to discuss is any additional fees including title transfer, registration, document fees, etc.
 
We're reaching the end of our lease this month on our 2016 SV. We have 33,000 miles on it (though we slowed down quite a bit after the first 7 months with the car, when we moved closer to my wife's employer). Payoff on the car is $12,900, and we leased for $0 down, $270/month. Dealers here are quoting me $400/month lease pricing now for new SVs, which seems crazy high, considering our 2012 SL and 2016 SV were both $270/month. I'm leaning toward just keeping the 2016, as I can finance it at 3% and that's $375/month for 36 months, cheaper than leasing a new car, and I get to keep/sell the car at the end of the 3 year period.

Am I missing something? I'm honestly shocked at how much the price has gone up vs. our previous two.
 
LeftieBiker said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
LeftieBiker said:
Is this an S24 (kwh) or an S30?
It would be a 24
The 24, being the Lizard Pack, may make the car worth more, at least in some cases.
You keep saying this but, all the current information which I see, appears to support that the chemistry of the 24 kwh and 30 kwh packs are the same. The results of reprogramming the charge monitoring circuitry in the 30 kwh Leafs also appears to support the conclusion that the rate of capacity loss for the 2 packs is about the same (which makes sense if the chemistry is the same).

https://flipthefleet.org/2018/30-kwh-nissan-leaf-firmware-update-to-correct-capacity-reporting/
 
Psyclonus said:
We're reaching the end of our lease this month on our 2016 SV. We have 33,000 miles on it (though we slowed down quite a bit after the first 7 months with the car, when we moved closer to my wife's employer). Payoff on the car is $12,900, and we leased for $0 down, $270/month. Dealers here are quoting me $400/month lease pricing now for new SVs, which seems crazy high, considering our 2012 SL and 2016 SV were both $270/month. I'm leaning toward just keeping the 2016, as I can finance it at 3% and that's $375/month for 36 months, cheaper than leasing a new car, and I get to keep/sell the car at the end of the 3 year period.

Am I missing something? I'm honestly shocked at how much the price has gone up vs. our previous two.

The reality is you are getting a much larger battery so yeah, the cost will be higher. I got mine when Nissan was still offering the full tax benefit and I am at $380 a month verses $245 a month for previous 2 leases. Incentives change. No two ways about that.

There are also indications that used EV prices are starting to rise. This is not completely unexpected as new entrants to EV driving are realizing even a degraded LEAF can cover their commuting needs with fuel costs covering as much as half the purchase price in just a few years.

The growing market of longer range used EVs will change that dynamic as I don't see used Bolts going for near premium prices due to their somewhat stripped down style. I am thinking this will push the "around 80 mile" EVs into a lower price point.
 
Psyclonus said:
We're reaching the end of our lease this month on our 2016 SV. We have 33,000 miles on it (though we slowed down quite a bit after the first 7 months with the car, when we moved closer to my wife's employer). Payoff on the car is $12,900, and we leased for $0 down, $270/month. Dealers here are quoting me $400/month lease pricing now for new SVs, which seems crazy high, considering our 2012 SL and 2016 SV were both $270/month. I'm leaning toward just keeping the 2016, as I can finance it at 3% and that's $375/month for 36 months, cheaper than leasing a new car, and I get to keep/sell the car at the end of the 3 year period.

Am I missing something? I'm honestly shocked at how much the price has gone up vs. our previous two.


I'm in the same situation. My dealer told me lease price is so high because residual is much lower now which translates into higher lease payments. Msrp isn't much different from what a 2016 SV was and what a 2019 SV is now it's all about the residual value being so low now!
 
LeftieBiker said:
Even if the chemistry is identical, the 30kwh pack has cells packed more densely, thus with worse cooling. From what I've seen I'd take a 24kwh pack over a 30.
Did you read the article I posted with my comment? If not, here is an interesting excerpt -

"This equation allows FTF to retrospectively apply the same “virtual update” to all the historical measures of SoH supplied by 151 owners of 30 kWh Leafs in the FTF database. The corrected SoH values decline at virtually the same rate as the 24 kWh Leafs. There is no longer any evidence of a statistical difference in reported SoH between the variants once the firmware upgrade is applied over the first 2.5 years since 30 kWh Leafs were manufactured."
 
I've been following this issue, including that piece. Unfortunately, some Leaf owners who have had the update applied have NOT seen a corresponding increase in actual range. It appears to me at this point that some cars have a defect that is correctable by this update, and that others have excessive degradation that the update does NOT correct. For this reason I continue to regard the 30kwh pack as problematic. It appears to be a bit of a crap shoot if you buy a car that has one.
 
Dooglas said:
leafygood said:
When we start working with the dealerships on purchasing, what is a good ball park we should aim for based on the above information?
I think you will find zero flexibility in the cost of buyout at end of lease, when you begin "working with dealerships". There is a residual figure in your contract, and a buyout fee. NMAC is offering no buyout promotions at this time and there is no money in it for the dealership that would cause them to subsidize your buyout. About the only other thing to discuss is any additional fees including title transfer, registration, document fees, etc.

So is it confirmed that all the gross payoff amount discounts are totally gone? Our 2015 SV lease is up next month, so that'd be lousy timing if so. At that point, it'll be a binary choice of either buying the car for the residual plus the usual fees or just turning it in. Hmmmm....

Keith
 
So is it confirmed that all the gross payoff amount discounts are totally gone?

Only the dealerships know for sure. They get a "matrix" that shows any NMAC discounts for trim and mileage at the beginning of every month, but very, very few will even admit that it exists. You'd have to find the exceedingly rare dealership that will show you one, because all negotiation on buyout is done exclusively with the dealers, now.
 
HornsKeith said:
So is it confirmed that all the gross payoff amount discounts are totally gone? Our 2015 SV lease is up next month, so that'd be lousy timing if so. At that point, it'll be a binary choice of either buying the car for the residual plus the usual fees or just turning it in. Hmmmm....
So, go talk to a dealer about a buyout. You'll find out soon enough. NMAC suggests you make an inspection appointment 2 months in advance of end-of-lease so you should get on with finding out what is actually within the realm of the possible. As I commented, don't be disappointed if the dealer offers next to nothing in the way of incentives. And report back how it goes.
 
LeftieBiker said:
I've been following this issue, including that piece. Unfortunately, some Leaf owners who have had the update applied have NOT seen a corresponding increase in actual range. It appears to me at this point that some cars have a defect that is correctable by this update, and that others have excessive degradation that the update does NOT correct. For this reason I continue to regard the 30kwh pack as problematic. It appears to be a bit of a crap shoot if you buy a car that has one.

The variability of the results is quite the norm it would seem. I think we need to look at data from people who had both the 24 kwh and 30 kwh packs and experienced no or very little change in driving patterns.

In my experience, my 30 kwh LEAF greatly outperformed my two 24 kwh packs by quite a wide margin and did so under much more extreme conditions. (Keeping in mind, I did not have NCTC on either 24 kwh LEAFs so fast charging was done but not relied on nearly as much)

Now, its hard to make any definitive statements due to the short 14 months I had the 30 kwh LEAF but I did do 116.2 miles on a single charge IN JANUARY 8 days before she was killed. So LEAF Spy stats be damned, I still contend the pack lost no more than "maybe" 1-2% in just under 30,000 miles and 280 QCs.
 
You live in one of the mildest climates in the country. My guess - and it is only a guess, at the moment - is that the 30kwh pack, even if it does use the Lizard chemistry, suffers from heat-induced degradation more because of the more densely-packed cells. So it may be that people in milder climates can get a great deal on a 30kwh Leaf by getting one with lost bars and then having the update applied. I'm not going to tell anyone to do that, though, because of the possibility that the update won't fix their particular car.
 
LeftieBiker said:
You live in one of the mildest climates in the country. My guess - and it is only a guess, at the moment - is that the 30kwh pack, even if it does use the Lizard chemistry, suffers from heat-induced degradation more because of the more densely-packed cells. So it may be that people in milder climates can get a great deal on a 30kwh Leaf by getting one with lost bars and then having the update applied. I'm not going to tell anyone to do that, though, because of the possibility that the update won't fix their particular car.

all 3 of my LEAFs lived in the same mild climate and there is no question that my 2016 LEAF suffered thru a LOT more heat. My 2011 iirc never saw more than 7 TBs. My 2013 only saw 8 TBs or more on a few extended trips. Contrast that to my 2016 that spent nearly EVERY day in Summer at 8 TBs or more.

But who knows what might have happened at 40,000 miles or a 2nd Summer, right? One thought could be the fact that the 24 kwh LEAFs were charged to 100% almost daily while the 2016 was charged to 100% only occasionally. After all, it would be tough to evaluate the effects of multiple daily QCs if I was always leaving home with a full battery.

For reference degradation on 2011; about 12%, my 2013; 9%, my 2016? 2% "maybe"...
 
LeftieBiker said:
My guess - and it is only a guess, at the moment - is that the 30kwh pack, even if it does use the Lizard chemistry, suffers from heat-induced degradation more because of the more densely-packed cells.
If this speculation were true, wouldn't the effect be even more pronounced with the 40 kwh pack?
 
Dooglas said:
LeftieBiker said:
My guess - and it is only a guess, at the moment - is that the 30kwh pack, even if it does use the Lizard chemistry, suffers from heat-induced degradation more because of the more densely-packed cells.
If this speculation were true, wouldn't the effect be even more pronounced with the 40 kwh pack?

If everything were identical, yes. As I understand it, the 40kwh pack uses a slightly different chemistry. Not more heat-tolerant, but not identical. That means we have to wait and see. I think my BMS has stopped updating SOH as of December, so I get to wait for Spring...
 
Dooglas said:
LeftieBiker said:
My guess - and it is only a guess, at the moment - is that the 30kwh pack, even if it does use the Lizard chemistry, suffers from heat-induced degradation more because of the more densely-packed cells.
If this speculation were true, wouldn't the effect be even more pronounced with the 40 kwh pack?

Yes if we ignore

A much more conservative fast charge profile
A different chemistry
A different BMS/LBC profile

Truth be told; the only thing that is common to the two packs is the nameplate.
 
Back
Top